Two or three years into my tenure as an executive at SamTrans and Caltrain, I was meeting with someone with ties to the tech industry — an executive, a high-level employee, a self-important marketer or programmer, or someone like that.
The conversation took an interesting turn when this person observed, in essence, that I must not be all that smart because I was working for a public agency.
Indeed, that I may not be all that smart is firmly established every week. Still, it was unnecessarily snide.
The good news for this person is that I had (and presumably still have) a great capacity to be amused by foolish and uninformed statements. It has served me well in my career in newspapers, a profession where, if you stay with it long enough, you will hear just about everything more than once.
All of which leads to today’s adventures in California politics, where we have a billionaire running for governor whose main argument seems to be that he knows how to be tough on billionaires, people trying to pass special taxes on billionaires, and a growing number of billionaires who are revving up to oppose taxes on billionaires by attacking public employee labor unions.
According to data reported by Forbes, there are 214 billionaires in California. According to the State Controller’s Office, there are more than 2.7 million government employees in California — 150,000-180,000 federal civilian employees, 240,000 state-level employees and 1.9 million local government employees.
None of them, I am willing to hazard, is a billionaire.
Against this backdrop comes this gem from my old friend (truly) and public spin maestro Sam Singer, commenting in Politico on behalf of opponents to the efforts to levy special taxes on the uber-rich, led by the always-aggressive Services Employees International Union.
“There’s a real distinction between the City Hall unions, SEIU, and real working unions — carpenters union, laborers union, building trades, electricians, police and fire,” Singer said, adding that those latter unions and business leaders are “likely going to be aligned as time goes forward.”
I added the italics for “real working” unions, because it is profoundly absurd.
Recommended for you
A teacher is not really working? In my 15 years at a public agency, I encountered countless colleagues who worked hard, took their jobs seriously and understood the unique responsibility that comes with serving the public.
Were there lazy and sloppy workers, even some who engaged in inappropriate behavior? Sure. But very few, and I am certain public employees do not have that market cornered. Perhaps you believe that every employee at a tech company is dynamic, hard-charging and highly effective. Anything is possible, I suppose.
My favorite part of Sam’s quote is where the “good” unions are “likely to be aligned as time goes forward.”
This hands me a laugh.
It is not just that billionaires abhor public employee unions. They do, and I am certain they are happy to vilify them. It is that they do not like unions at all, as evidenced by long-standing efforts to fight unionization. Unions have influence, largely through numbers of members. Billionaires have influence largely through numbers of dollars. Billionaires trust money more, especially when it is in their hands.
Around here, billionaires are largely the creation of Silicon Valley, a place that once was held in high esteem by the public, but clearly has had its reputation tarnished by — what? Greed? The absence of loyalty to employees? Recklessness?
Facebook famously had as its unofficial slogan, “Move fast and break things.” While the company is a mainstay of this region in its physical presence, its hyperactive philosophy is a long way from that of the founding figures of the tech industry who embodied a different principle: Move slowly and build things.
Silicon Valley pioneers William Hewlett and David Packard asserted: Take care of your employees, they will take care of your customers, and that will take care of the shareholders. HP was famous for the upward mobility its employees through savings, stock and education incentives for everyone, from custodians to product managers. But latter-day HP was one of the first to contract out its custodial services, which prompted SEIU’s Janitors for Justice campaign to create a uniform contract for these early-stage gig workers.
And so the battle is joined between unions and billionaires in an era of populism, which is classically defined as politics that divides society into two warring camps.
And I am reminded of the classic moment in the 1949 movie, “All the Kings Men,” (based on a truly great novel), where Willie Stark says, “I’m gonna soak the fat boys and spread it out thin.”
(3) comments
Isn't it funny that whenever unions are discussed the very important Teacher's Union is mentioned.
And indeed, the Teacher's Union seems very powerful and inserting itself into many political topics.
... and yet, the almighty teacher's union can never seem to do anything about:
- Teacher being one of occupations with a BSc that has one of the lowest salaries
- Teachers aren't the ones getting rich, but administrators certainly are (incl. those at SamTrans and Caltrain of course)
- School Districts are extremely rich around here. They could afford classrooms of 15 kids easily, and yet the teacher's union watches as teachers work in classrooms of 25-30.
- School Segregation, which has led to "underserved" schools
- Magnet Schools for rich people (Montessori, Mandarin Immersion, "Enrichment" or "STEAM" schools are expensive luxuries paid for by "underserved" schools of course.
... or in short: the almighty teacher's union seems to have absolutely no one in their ranks who can read a simple School District budget. I think that is a union that is messing with their members.
I have no problem taxing billionaires, because I am not one. However, the tax has to WORK. And the SEIU proposal has already caused at least 6 to already leave the state for lower-tax states. Just the THREAT of the wealth tax has already cost us money that the SEIU won't replace. To be effective, such a tax would have to be levied everywhere - so billionaires could not escape it. It was and is stupid to pass such a tax in Calif., and drive out key revenue generators - unless the tax could be both national and inter-national.... and similar taxes have already failed in Europe. So rant all you want, but please propose something THAT WILL WORK, NOT HURT. Note:
The top 1% of earners in California pay about:
~38–50% of all state income tax revenue
The SEIU is a miserable outfit that encourages its membership to hate anyone with a decent income, whether it was earned through hard work or not. It is a typical socialist ploy with union leadership living like kings. The first thing Cesar Chavez did was to purchase a mansion in the foothills and he lived in luxury including hapless companions until death. Should this tax measure pass, and the targeted audience leaves the State, who do you think the leftist politicians will come after to bridge the gap? Yes, you and me, the suckers who believed in labor union propaganda who stayed behind! Besides, the State would be peeing the revenues in where it always ends up: the pockets of the activists and the campaign advisors.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.